Don Barone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> If they were not meausred (sic) to be identical then one
> has to assume that it was a co-incidnece.
>
> Now what are the odds of two major lines out of
> even say 1000 that we could find at Giza that
> would have exactly the same measurement ?
>
> Your argument against the proof at Giza is itself
> a fallacy.


You must have forgotten this part I posted earlier:

Quote

Coincidence is the noteworthy alignment of two or more events or circumstances without obvious causal connection. The word is derived from the Latin co- ("in," "with," "together") and incidere ("to fall on").

... A coincidence does not prove a relationship, but related events may be expected to have a higher index of coincidence. From a statistical perspective, coincidences are inevitable and often less remarkable than they may appear intuitively. The odds that two people share a birthday, for example, reaches 50% with a group of just 22[1] (see the Birthday paradox). (emphasis added) [en.wikipedia.org]

Here: [www.hallofmaat.com]


These two events are related by function, geographic proximity, chronology, and the culture that built them, so we would expect a high degree of coincidence in any of the measurements we take today. The degree of coincidence does not negate the fact that it is a coincidence. Only evidence of intent, or of a causal relationship, can prove the relationships were anything but a coincidence. You have neither, ergo the logical option is to ignore your coincidences since they do nothing to further our knowledge of Old Kingdom Egypt.

As I have said earlier, there really is no point in discussing this any further. Your arguments are fatally flawed, illogical, and have no weight of evidence to support them. Until or unless you have evidence of intent, you are just wasting people's time with these numerous posts claiming coincidences are something they are not. You are free, of course, to waste your own time. However, you are not free to leave flawed, inaccurate or dishonest claims about ancient Egypt up where people who don't know better can read them and be seriously misled by those claims. If it weren't for the responsibility held by those who know better to keep those who don't from being misled, I would have continued ignoring your geomancy posts indefinitely.

Anthony

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.